OT: The Buffalo Bills on borrowed time in western NY and the AFC East?

[DaBruinz]

Lets review some things.

The Bills, Bengals and Jaguars have not done enough to maximize their earning potential. The Colts hadn't done so prior to last year, but that is changing.

The Jaguars and the City of Jacksonville were ill-prepared for the SuperBowl and they had several years to get the City to where it needed to be. I think they needed something on the order of 10 or 12 cruise ships to accommodate all the extra people because there wasn't enough hotel capacity in the city.

Ralph Wilson and Paul Brown refuse to sell the naming rights to anyone because they insist on keeping their name on the stadium. That is pure ego and its hurting themselves and their teams. And they can stipulate that their name remain in the title. They could say for example: "Raplh Wilson's KODAK-Eastmann Stadium" or "Kodak-Eastmann's Ralph Wilson Stadium."

The Bills, for all their claims of being a small market team, don't do enough to maximize their revenues. They drew over 67000 people per game last year. Which was right behind the Pats. The Bills website list the stadium capacity at 73,967. So, based on the ESPN AVG. attendance number of 67,646, the Bills are at 91.48% and not ESPN listed 84.5%.

There is no reason for the Bills and Bengals not to have built new stadiums. Had they done so, they would have the revenue streams needed to support the team.

There are companies all over who buy luxury boxes at stadiums in cities where there HQ is NOT located. If they have a major sales office in a particular city, in all likely-hood, they will go out and by luxury boxes at the local stadiums to 1) promote their own business 2) bring clients to as part of a business outing 3) as a reward for employees. As for getting companies to sign, there are many ways to do this, but its up to the team to maximize the money potential.

 

[RichardHead]

The old Foxboro had 80,000 seats? That's how many seats there are in Ralph Wilson stadium.

You're right that Foxboro didn't have 80,000 but it was mid 60-s, and from what others are saying here Ralph Wislson limits it to 70,000 (is that really true?). But when you said "massive" I was thinking FedEx field type "massive", which it doesn't really strike me as.

 

[DaBruinz]

You're right that Foxboro didn't have 80,000 but it was mid 60-s, and from what others are saying here Ralph Wislson limits it to 70,000 (is that really true?). But when you said "massive" I was thinking FedEx field type "massive", which it doesn't really strike me as.

Here is the link to the Bills website. It lists their stadium capacity as being 73,967.

http://www.buffalobills.com/facility/StadiumFacts.jsp

One part I find REALLY interesting is that they have 76 "Dugout" Boxes and 88 boxes at Club level. Hmm.. Was someone around here saying that they couldn't get sponsors for boxes?

 

[upstater1]

You're right that Foxboro didn't have 80,000 but it was mid 60-s, and from what others are saying here Ralph Wislson limits it to 70,000 (is that really true?). But when you said "massive" I was thinking FedEx field type "massive", which it doesn't really strike me as.

74,000 is the limit on the tickets they sell. They do this to preserve sellouts. But in terms of actual seats, it's very near 80,000, if not 80,000.

 

[upstater1]

Here is the link to the Bills website. It lists their stadium capacity as being 73,967.

http://www.buffalobills.com/facility/StadiumFacts.jsp

One part I find REALLY interesting is that they have 76 "Dugout" Boxes and 88 boxes at Club level. Hmm.. Was someone around here saying that they couldn't get sponsors for boxes?

From this same link: Largest Crowd: 80,368 vs. Miami, 10/4/92.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[upstater1]

Who did they resign? Anthony Thomas? Chris Kelsay? They didn't resign any players comanding huge salaries.

Chris Kelsay got a $14 million bonus with $24 million over 4 years.

You were saying?

Does selling tickets to Erie County probably at a discounted rate count? Because I have a feeling that is how they sell out every week. Funny, I am the only one bringing anything documented and you are trashing it as bogus. Where is your proof?

You haven't documented anything. Show me where it says that the Bills have a deal like the Raiders do. How am I supposed to document a false negative? You want me to find an article that says the Bills do not have a deal like the Raiders deal? Huh? Fact, the Buffalo Bills pays Erie County, not the other way around.

Not knocking it. They are also dead last in average ticket sales. I think

No, the problem is you don't think. Even your very own link to ESPN showed that they are regularly 8th or 9th in ticket sales. I guess because you're deaf, dumb and blind you don't understand that. You get upset that people insult you on this website, but no one here is more deserving of such insults, because you're a liar. You say they are dead last in average ticket sales, and yet the very link you posted showed that's not the case. What are we to think when we read your posts?

Oh, I didn't know the Sabres had a rule that you can only attend one game a season. If I knew that then I wouldn't have said anything. 52 home games times 19,000 means that 988,000 different people went to a Sabres game last year or a third of Buffalo's population.

Are you talking to yourself? What the heck are you arguing here? They sold 988,000 tckets at a lot more money per than the Bills. You yourself said hockey isn't ass popular, and yet the demand for Sabres tickets and the amount the Sabres bring in outstrips the totals of a few NfL teams. That tells me there is buying power among the Buffalo sportsfan base. The inept Bills are seemingly incapable of capitalizing on it the way the Sabres have.

Man, look at your own damn link and read it carefully. The Bills averaged 72,000 a season in ticket sales for the years prior to last year. They were either 8th or 9th in the league. If you think the NFL wants to ditch a franchise drawing that many fans, you're mistaken.

 

[upstater1]

Who did they resign? Anthony Thomas? Chris Kelsay? They didn't resign any players comanding huge salaries.

Chris Kelsay got a $14 million bonus with $24 million over 4 years.

You were saying?

Does selling tickets to Erie County probably at a discounted rate count? Because I have a feeling that is how they sell out every week. Funny, I am the only one bringing anything documented and you are trashing it as bogus. Where is your proof?

You haven't documented anything. Show me where it says that the Bills have a deal like the Raiders do. How am I supposed to document a false negative? You want me to find an article that says the Bills do not have a deal like the Raiders deal? Huh? Fact, the Buffalo Bills pays Erie County, not the other way around.

Not knocking it. They are also dead last in average ticket sales. I think

No, the problem is you don't think. Even your very own link to ESPN showed that they are regularly 8th or 9th in ticket sales. I guess because you're deaf, dumb and blind you don't understand that. You get upset that people insult you on this website, but no one here is more deserving of such insults, because you're a liar. You say they are dead last in average ticket sales, and yet the very link you posted showed that's not the case. What are we to think when we read your posts?

Oh, I didn't know the Sabres had a rule that you can only attend one game a season. If I knew that then I wouldn't have said anything. 52 home games times 19,000 means that 988,000 different people went to a Sabres game last year or a third of Buffalo's population.

Are you talking to yourself? What the heck are you arguing here? They sold 988,000 tckets at a lot more money per than the Bills. You yourself said hockey isn't ass popular, and yet the demand for Sabres tickets and the amount the Sabres bring in outstrips the totals of a few NfL teams. That tells me there is buying power among the Buffalo sportsfan base. The inept Bills are seemingly incapable of capitalizing on it the way the Sabres have.

Man, look at your own damn link and read it carefully. The Bills averaged 72,000 a season in ticket sales for the years prior to last year. They were either 8th or 9th in the league. If you think the NFL wants to ditch a franchise drawing that many fans, you're mistaken.

 

[upstater1]

Yeah, you got me there... I did have to go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay far back to remember a time when the Bills actually mattered a damn.... Good point.... it has been practically forever since anyone cared anything about the Bills...
If the Bills ownership group wanted to move to L.A., Cmsr. Goodell would help pack the moving vans. Your blind homerism does nothing to change that.

Idiot. Look to the right of the screen at how many posts I have on PatsFans. I'm a Patriot fan, and have been since 1976.

 

[upstater1]

I didn't say the county were definitely buying the tickets. I theorized that they did. I never portrayed it as facts. I never knew that when you say something is "probably" is a fact.

The only bogus facts seem to becoming from you. You said the Bills capacity was 15,000 more than the Patriots, but since 1998 (actually 2002 when Gillette opened) that hasn't been the case. You might want to get your facts straight. Those seats under the tarp are not counted in capacity figures nor can they be used.

And I think I am done talking about the Bills' stadium. We have talk far too long about Ralph Wilson stadium for patriots board.

Well, it's 12,000. Not 15,000. I was off by 3,000. Look at the link DaBruinz provided you. 80,300 attended a Bills-Miami game before they put down the tarp. Those seats are still there. That's the stadium's capacity.

 

[upstater1]

The very first post in this thread says "Once Ralph dies I expect the team to move to California - The Anaheim Bills?"

So who's the one that can't read...?
The Bills are near the top of a short list of teams that could very easily be playing in L.A. over the next few years. The fact that you are too moronic to realize this does not change that fact.
The very first post in this thread says "Once Ralph dies I expect the team to move to California - The Anaheim Bills?"

So who's the one that can't read...?

Yeah... the last thing the league would ever want would be to double the value of one of their franchises....

Double the value of a franchise? Who gets the money? The owner of that franchise. Who gets the money if you put a franchise there? All 32 other owners. Man, do you balance your checkbook? Or does your wife do it? I hope for your sake someone else is looking after your money.

 

[upstater1]

Well then I stand corrected... he's an idiot, but not a homer

You haven't got a single fact correct on this thread. Just say one thing that's correct.

 

[spacecrime]

lots of beserker posts

wow, that was enteraining. don't stop now. have another starbucks and hit the keyboard some more

 

[Rob0729]

Well, it's 12,000. Not 15,000. I was off by 3,000. Look at the link DaBruinz provided you. 80,300 attended a Bills-Miami game before they put down the tarp. Those seats are still there. That's the stadium's capacity.

I wasn't going to respond again, but you made me do it with this ludicrious comment. DaBruinz link proved me right. Look at the first fact and figure. It states:

Capacity: 73,967

Exactly what I said. Here is the link again because you must have missed it:

http://www.buffalobills.com/facility/StadiumFacts.jsp

They changed the capacity in 1998 when they renewed their lease because they couldn't sell out games. Look up your facts.

It is fun watching you stomp and cry like a little child. It is quite amusing. Next time you throw insults at someone about lying about the facts, maybe you should actually know the facts.

 

[Rob0729]

Here is an explaination how they removed seats in 1998:

The current stadium is open-air, with a capacity of 73,967, with an artificial surface; the current surface is AstroTurf GameDay Grass, one of several newer types of artificial turf from AstroTurf that offers more grass-like playing conditions. The stadium originally had a capacity of 80,020, however it was refurbished in 1998 with superior quality seating, reducing overall capacity. The purpose of removing these seats was likely to avoid TV blackouts, as NFL policy require games to be blacked out in the home market if a game does not sellout.

http://www.answers.com/topic/ralph-wilson-stadium

Can we end this now?

 

[upstater1]

I wasn't going to respond again, but you made me do it with this ludicrious comment. DaBruinz link proved me right. Look at the first fact and figure. It states:

Capacity: 73,967

Exactly what I said. Here is the link again because you must have missed it:

http://www.buffalobills.com/facility/StadiumFacts.jsp

They changed the capacity in 1998 when they renewed their lease because they couldn't sell out games. Look up your facts.

It is fun watching you stomp and cry like a little child. It is quite amusing. Next time you throw insults at someone about lying about the facts, maybe you should actually know the facts.

Sigh. Read my original post on this subject where I wrote that the link to the ESPN numbers you provided was bogus because it was dividing the tix sold by original capacity (80,000). I was the one who pointed out that actual capacity on gameday was less than that. Go back and read my post.

Next, your math is abysmally awful, as DaBruinz has pointed out repeatedly. Do the math again. 69,000 tix sold divided by 74,000 capacity is 90% capacity. Not 84.5% as you claimed!! Guess what: 69,000 divided by 80,000, however, happens to be 84%.

Hilarious! So ESPN is taking the actual tix sold last year and dividing them by the 80,000 seat capacity!! Which is what I stated in the first place. And they're wrong for doing so. And I've been arguing all along that it would more proper to divide them by 74,000.

Then, consider this, if indeed the seats have actually been removed, they haven't used that space for refurbshment, because the tarp is still there! In other words, they did it just to reduce seating capacity. Who knows if the seats are there or not? It doesn't matter. The whole point of this argument was to show you that measuring attendance by percent of capacity filled was a backward way of doing it. I have no idea why you refuse to acknowledge actual tickets sold as the only proper way of doing it.

With your way of thinking, it's much more impressive for 38,000 fans to attend a UConn football game (100% capacity) than it is for $100,000 fans to attend a PSU football game (90% capacity).

 

[Rob0729]

yet another link you have trouble reading. At least you're consistent. That's capacity for NFL football games. Look further down in your very own link. 80,350 ticketes sold to the Miami game a decade ago. What happened to all those seats? They are still there. They are covered with tarp. As I said in my very first post on this topic.

Next, your math is abysmally awful, as DaBruinz has pointed out repeatedly. Can you count? Do the math again. 69,000 tix sold divided by 74,000 capacity is 90% capacity. Not 84.5% as you claimed!! Guess what: 69,000 divided by 80,000, however, happens to be 84%.

Hilarious! So ESPN is taking the actual tix sold last year and dividing them by the 80,000 seat capacity!! Which is what I stated in the first place. And they're wrong for doing so. And I've been arguing all along that it would more proper to divide them by 74,000 since the rest of the seats are under the tarp!!

Man, you are incredibly lame.

Oops, aparently you didn't read my next post. I bet you have egg on your face now.

I do have to admit your posts are entertaining. I can almost see you stomping up and down with your face all red in front of your computer.

 

[Rob0729]

Sigh. Read my original post on this subject where I wrote that the link to the ESPN numbers you provided was bogus because it was dividing the tix sold by original capacity (80,000). I was the one who pointed out that actual capacity on gameday was less than that. Go back and read my post.

Next, your math is abysmally awful, as DaBruinz has pointed out repeatedly. Do the math again. 69,000 tix sold divided by 74,000 capacity is 90% capacity. Not 84.5% as you claimed!! Guess what: 69,000 divided by 80,000, however, happens to be 84%.

Hilarious! So ESPN is taking the actual tix sold last year and dividing them by the 80,000 seat capacity!! Which is what I stated in the first place. And they're wrong for doing so. And I've been arguing all along that it would more proper to divide them by 74,000.

Then, consider this, if indeed the seats have actually been removed, they haven't used that space for refurbshment, because the tarp is still there! In other words, they did it just to reduce seating capacity. Who knows if the seats are there or not? It doesn't matter. The whole point of this argument was to show you that measuring attendance by percent of capacity filled was a backward way of doing it. I have no idea why you refuse to acknowledge actual tickets sold as the only proper way of doing it.

With your way of thinking, it's much more impressive for 38,000 fans to attend a UConn football game (100% capacity) than it is for $100,000 fans to attend a PSU football game (90% capacity).

Way to change your post after you realized you looked foolish. Don't worry though. I was able to capture your original post for all to see. Way to change what you wrote though.

 

[QuiGon]

Way to change your post after you realized you looked foolish. Don't worry though. I was able to capture your original post for all to see. Way to change what you wrote though.

Ouch. That's what we call getting slammed...

Sorry, upstater, but what were you saying about how I didn't know what I was talking about and stuff like that...?

 

[upstater1]

Ouch. That's what we call getting slammed...

Sorry, upstater, but what were you saying about how I didn't know what I was talking about and stuff like that...?

That's because you're a moron. And you're wrong again. My post on the subject is on this very thread. Read it. Here is what Rob wrote originally:

ROB: In 2006, Buffalo was dead last in stadium capacity with an average of 84.5% of the tickets per game sold. In 2005, they were 28th with 89.9% of the tickets sold. In 2004, they were 28th again with 89.7%. In 2003, they had a good year with 91.2% being still 28th in the league in attendance. In 2002 with all the hype with Bledsoe, they were 29th in the league with 85.6% capacity (also eventhough they have about 15,000 more seats they only averaged 30 more people per game in the stands than the Pats had that year).

In contrast, the Pats have had over 100% capacity (SRO tickets count as the overage) during the whole period. I really don't think the Pats and Bills fan base is very comparable as far as attending the game at all.

There is a certain segment of the Bills fans that would pay more to go to the game, but there is a whole bunch who won't. Besides, it is a catch 22. Wilson raises the ticket price and he risks selling out even fewer games which means more local blackouts and TV revenue is lost and the fan base dwindles.

This is how I responded in my first post:

28th in the league in attendance???!! You're looking at capacity!! They SELL OUT every freakin' game! They are top 10 in attendance. It's backward to measure attendance by percentage of capacity, especially when the stadium is regularly cordoned off so they don't have to sell the ACTUAL capacity which is 80,000 seats. Have you ever been to a Bills game? Have you ever been inside the stadium?

Those ESPN stats are funky because they are taking actual seats sold and measuring them against the stadium's footprint. Whereas for NFL sell out purposes, the stadium only holds 70,000 seats.

And Rob got mad by saying I'm changing my tune because I wrote this:

Sigh. Read my original post on this subject where I wrote that the link to the ESPN numbers you provided was bogus because it was dividing the tix sold by original capacity (80,000). I was the one who pointed out that actual capacity on gameday was less than that. Go back and read my post.

Next, your math is abysmally awful, as DaBruinz has pointed out repeatedly. Do the math again. 69,000 tix sold divided by 74,000 capacity is 90% capacity. Not 84.5% as you claimed!! Guess what: 69,000 divided by 80,000, however, happens to be 84%.

Hilarious! So ESPN is taking the actual tix sold last year and dividing them by the 80,000 seat capacity!! Which is what I stated in the first place. And they're wrong for doing so. And I've been arguing all along that it would more proper to divide them by 74,000.

Then, consider this, if indeed the seats have actually been removed, they haven't used that space for refurbshment, because the tarp is still there! In other words, they did it just to reduce seating capacity. Who knows if the seats are there or not? It doesn't matter. The whole point of this argument was to show you that measuring attendance by percent of capacity filled was a backward way of doing it. I have no idea why you refuse to acknowledge actual tickets sold as the only proper way of doing it.

With your way of thinking, it's much more impressive for 38,000 fans to attend a UConn football game (100% capacity) than it is for $100,000 fans to attend a PSU football game (90% capacity).

Now, show me how that's changing my tune, when it mirrors exactly what I wrote in my first post!! Come on, QuiGon. We already know REob doesn't have an ounce of honesty in is body.

He's the guy who claimed:

Rochester is over 100 miles from Buffalo
Erie County subsidizes the Bills
The Bills are last in ticket sales
They only sell to 84.5% of capacity.

It's laughable that you agree with these bogus and preposterous stats.

It's also funny that Rob says I'm changing my tune when he's the one who changed his tune. Initially he argued that the Bills only fill the stadium to 84.5% capacity. And then he came back and claimed capacity is 74,000 seats. Well which is it? A quick check of the math tells you it can't be both. 69,000 tix sold is NOT 84.5% of 74,000. The guy either contradicted himself, changed his tune, or can't do math, OR MORE LIKELY All of these.

Can you do math, QuiGon? Now who got slammed?

 

[Rob0729]

And Rob got mad by saying I'm changing my tune because I wrote this:

Mad?!? LOL! Normally I do get mad when people throw around unprevoked insults on these boards, but your posts are friggin' comedy.